On March 1, the day after their audience with Francis, the FSSP issued a communiqué that put to rest fearful speculation that their leadership had been summoned to Rome. Rather, it revealed that the meeting was scheduled in response to “a request from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter.”
The purpose of the requested meeting with Francis, at least according to the communiqué, was twofold:
Firstly, “to express their deep gratitude to the Holy Father for the decree of February 11, 2022.”
The referenced decree granted members of FSSP the faculty “to celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass, and to carry out the sacraments and other sacred rites” using the liturgical books in force in the year 1962. The decree also suggested, however, that “the provisions of the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes be taken into account as well.”
We will return to this critically important concept momentarily.
Secondly, the FSSP wished “to share with [Francis] the difficulties encountered in [the decree’s] application.” In this, they seem to be referring to their post-Traditionis dismissal from certain dioceses, most notably in France.
It’s not clear whether or not the FSSP really imagined that Francis would provide some kind of relief, but if so, the mission appears to have failed. Perhaps the visit was intended to be more symbolic, a way of showing wavering bishops in places where they currently serve, See? We’re loyal sons of His Humbleness too!
The communiqué went on to say:
The Pope was very understanding and invited the Fraternity of St. Peter to continue to build up ecclesial communion ever more fully through its own proper charism.
In response to the communiqué, many traditionalist commentators initially expressed relief. That relief, however, was short lived.
Later that same day, an internal FSSP communiqué marked “Ad usum Cleri FSSP” (for the use of the Priests of the FSSP), was leaked to the public. That text revealed that Francis had expressed his wish for the FSSP to take part in “the concelebration of the Chrism Mass, or at least the presence and Eucharistic Communion of priests at this ceremony.”
Reaction to this bit of information sparked all manner of outrage, some well-founded, others not so much.
For example, Peter Kwasniewski took to Twitter to declare that the “FSSP & other TLM clergy should just say no” to concelebration of the Novus Ordo Chrism Mass.
Eric Sammons, Editor-in-Chief of the tradservative publication, Crisis Magazine, posted a tweet of his own, one that belongs squarely in the unhinged category:
To force a priest of a clerical society established by a saint-pope with the charism of celebrating a particular rite of the Church to celebrate a Mass of another rite as a sign of obedience is a violation of that charism and a sinful demand.
I’m not sure which is more laughable, the “saint-pope” or the “particular rite” comment.
About the latter, Summorum Pontificum, which Sammons has hailed as one of Benedict’s “great administrative decisions,” plainly asserts that the Novus Ordo is the “Ordinary Form of the one Roman Rite.” Sammons even made a podcast explaining to listeners how “we celebrate the Latin rite in two forms.”
Has he since changed his mind? Maybe so, but I doubt it.
Beyond that, Sammons is just plain wrong to suggest that the FSSP is being forced to celebrate.
Now, perhaps they will face a showdown over concelebration in some places. To be fair, however, Francis added “or at least the presence and Eucharistic Communion of priests at this ceremony,” i.e., their presence at the Chrism Mass in choir. There is no “demand” being made here, much less a “sinful demand.”
One could also argue that the point is not so much about “obedience” as it is about unity. We’ll return to this shortly.
Archbishop Viganò had perhaps the most noteworthy reaction. He wrote via X:
Bergoglio’s vile blackmail is clear: “We allow you to celebrate your rites only on the condition that you accept ours” — rites that are the Protestant counterfeit of the true ones.
Imperial authority also demanded this of the early Christians: “Your religion is allowed in the Roman Pantheon only on the condition that you burn incense at the statue of Caesar.”
Judging by the clumsy censorship of the public statement, it seems that Bergoglio’s duplicity has found emulators in the FSSP.
In many ways, Viganò is on target. Let’s begin by addressing his final comment about duplicity.
What does it mean that FSSP leadership made a conscious decision to leave mention of the Chrism Mass out of their public statement, i.e., what does this tell us?
Well, for one thing, it tells us that they are uneasy about the matter, i.e., their leadership evidently considers it a source of conflict and concern. Perhaps they left mention of the Chrism Mass out of their public communiqué, not so much to deceive or even protect the faithful, but for fear of giving bishops a reason to press the issue even more aggressively than they might otherwise be inclined.
But why should the FSSP in any way be conflicted about being present in choir at the Novus Ordo Chrism Mass?
This brings me to the first points raised by Archbishop Viganò, namely, his suggestion that the Novus Ordo is a “Protestant counterfeit” that is tantamount to burning incense to an idol.
Whether or not concelebration, or even presence in choir, is appropriate for FSSP priests comes down to one basic question:
Is the Novus Ordo a Catholic rite, or more specifically, is it a particular form of the one Roman Rite?
If indeed the answer to this question is yes, then participation in the Novus Ordo Chrism Mass is in no way problematic, rather, it is a laudable, tangible expression of unity with both the local bishop and the Bishop of Rome. In other words, there is no justification whatsoever for just saying no.
Moreover, one should expect a fraternity of traditional Catholic priests to eagerly do its level best to grant the Roman Pontiff’s humble wishes in the matter. (NB: Once again it bears mention that if the internal communiqué can be trusted, which in light of the gamesmanship on display is not a given, Francis did not make any hard demands in this regard.)
At this, we have arrived at the heart of the problem: The FSSP is conflicted over the Chrism Mass because it is, by choice, living in the shadow of at least two very dark and dangerous lies:
One, they publicly accept the Novus Ordo Missae as a Catholic rite, and two, they profess that Jorge Bergoglio is the Holy Roman Pontiff and Vicar of Christ.
And you shall know the truth: and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:32)
Living a lie, by contrast, becomes increasingly burdensome as the truth imposes itself upon those who deny it. The FSSP is experiencing this firsthand.
All of that said, let’s take a closer look at what the FSSP communiqué reveals.
Recall that Francis is said to have “invited the Fraternity of St. Peter to continue to build up ecclesial communion ever more fully through its own proper charism.”
In order to decipher exactly what this means, we need only view the situation through the lens of Traditionis Custodes and the accompanying Letter to Bishops.
It is clear that “ecclesial communion” in this case refers very specifically to the liturgical unity of which Francis stated, “I intend to re-establish unity throughout the Church of the Roman Rite” by way of the Novus Ordo, which is henceforth to be considered “the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”
So, how is the FSSP to contribute to the building up of liturgical unity within the Novus Ordo via its own proper charism?
To the Catholic mind, this is not possible.
The Bergoglian mind, however, conceives of things rather differently. To this way of calculating, the Traditional Latin Mass – though no longer considered the lex orandi of the Roman Rite at all – remains useful, but only insofar as it can be used as a vehicle for moving those attached to tradition into the conciliar millieu of which the Novus Ordo is but one substantial part.
This process will take time. It must be undertaken in steps, similar to the proverbial boiling of the frog. Bergoglio knows this.
As he wrote to the bishops in explanation of Traditionis Custodes:
It is up to you to proceed [re: the use of the Missale Romanum of 1962] in such a way as to return to a unitary form of celebration … Indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II… [Emphasis added]
FSSP participation in the Novus Ordo Chrism Mass represents a turning up of the heat, a step in the process of leading those “rooted in” the Traditional Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo, not the least of whom are the Fraternity priests themselves.
If nothing else can be said, the Bergoglian mind is diabolically brilliant. Notice that Francis indicated that “the presence and Eucharistic Communion” of FSSP priests at the Novus Ordo Chrism Mass would be pleasing to him, not their mere presence alone.
This is important insofar as some FSSP priests may very well harbor positive doubt about the validity of the Novus Ordo consecration and, if present in choir, they may be forced to either out themselves or violate their own convictions. In any case, the message sent to certain FSSP faithful will be clear enough:
If Holy Communion at the Novus Ordo is good enough for my Fraternity priest to receive, then the Mass of Paul VI must certainly be acceptable, even if less pleasing on so many levels. That crack in the door is all that Satan needs to begin siphoning souls…
Long story short, the FSSP’s recent audience with Francis was far from innocuous, but let’s be clear:
To concelebrate or not is the least of the FSSP’s problems. Unless and until they come to embrace the truth about Francis, Vatican II, the conciliar church, and the Novus Ordo Missae, they will remain embroiled in some controversy or another.
